Talk:Indeterminacy/@comment-29564364-20171007135629/@comment-29564364-20171217051214
«I know you didn’t explicit state that but I was making a point.» It was to make the point that Omniscience trumps Absolute Intelligence, but I never argued against that in the first place, so bringing that up was useless. «To be clear I responded because your OP states Omniscients are basically stupid because they just know without performing any task to get to an answer.» I said "could," not "are," which implies possibility and not certainty. But after extrapolating on the subject (or rather repeating myself over and over again, hoping you'll eventually get it) like I did below, I believe that total omniscience and any kind of intelligence defined as the ability to acquire knowledge and skills are mutually exclusive. And just to be clear, when I say Omniscience, I mean total Omniscience. It was never question of inherent Omniscience. «What I’m trying to get across to you is it is impossible for an Omniscient to be stupid and you can not be smarter than one. The game of semantics your playing with knowledge and intellect will not change that.» You're the one playing semantics because you considers the two as one when they are not. Intelligence = learning and reasoning skills Knowledge = what is already learned Having all knowledge removes the possibility to learn and the need to reason because you already know all the conclusions. How is that so hard for you to understand? «If they know that there is no intelligent life in universe a but there is in universe b and they are asked where to send this universe busting bomb I’m quite sure they could reason to send it to universe a. ... They would still be able to explain. » That hypothetical situation is flawed. They wouldn't need to reason to arrive at that conclusion since the reasoning and the conclusion are already part of their knowledge. «What do you think teaching is? Teachers have already acquired the knowledge they teach us but the whole point is they can explain it to us so we understand.» Students generally don't know as much as the teachers do, which is why it's their job to explain it in terms that students are already familiar with before introducing new terms, which does require reasoning. On the other hand, burning a two thousand words essay into your memory and regurgitating it word for word afterward does not required reasoning, which is what an omniscient being sharing their knowledge would be doing. Once something is learned, it's learned, and recalling it requires memory, not learning or reasoning skills. «Also the definition of intelligence is the ability to acquire knowledge and skills. So whether born with it or acquired an omniscient has all knowledge. So omniscience is the highest level of intelligence.» See? THIS is a prime example of you playing your silly semantics game. You first define intelligence as the ability to acquire knowledge and skills, then claim that Omniscients are supremely intelligent because they have all knowledge by equating said knowledge with the ability to acquire it when you just acknowledged a difference between the two in the very same reply. Also, if the user was born with it, then they did not acquire it through their learning skills. «It’s even right there in the also called (Preeminent Intelligence).» Completely and utterly irrelevant. This is another example of your semantics game. The concept of Omniscience remains the same regardless of the label you want to slap on it, and it deals with knowledge, not intelligence. It's even in the name: "Omni" means "all", and "science" means "to know", so omniscience means "all-knowing". The fact that someone added Preeminent Intelligence in the also called section doesn't prove you right, it only proves that there is someone else out there who misunderstood the distinction between knowledge and intelligence like you do. «You have acquired all knowledge and all skills. You said you can be smarter than Omniscience I am saying this makes no sense because omniscience is as smart as it gets.» The only reason it makes no sense to you is because you keep confusing intelligence and knowledge, and total Omniscience with inherent Omniscience. «Just like you can not be stronger than omnipotence.» Omnipotence Embodiment And I think the expression you're looking for is "greater" or "more powerful."